tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN September 16, 2010 10:00am-1:00pm EDT
who will be good citizens growing up. host: jean, we will have to leave it at that. wendell expect to see any action on this? guest: the dream act should come to the senate floor next wednesday. that is providing the defense authorization bill even goes ford -- the decision will be made by the end of the week. host: please come back. the house is going into session as we speak. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] they will be in session for most of the day. the president has several events on his calendar and is living with his economic team and with the vice president. his meeting with senator menendez about immigration today. he is attending a fund-raiser
for the democratic national committee tonight. that is all going on today. nancy pelosi will hold her weekly press conference today. it is something c-span will be taping and covering. ." . . [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is
day by day and lead your people to greatness. we ask each of us you are the -- you are the one who asks each of us a life worthy of your calling. by embracing the responsibilities of our station in life, each of us is to perform our duties with humanity, neatness and patience. by baring with one another with understanding we are to make every effort to preserve the unit we have been -- unity we have been given by your divine promise and seek peace at ever-turning events. your guidance is with us now and will be fully revealed in the end. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the
last day's proceedings and announces to the house her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from texas, congressman olson. mr. olson: will the members, floor staff and guests in the gallery please rise for the pledge of allegiance? i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, during my recent high-tech manufacturing tour i saw firsthand the success of some of new mexico's home-grown companies. while creating jobs, local small businesses like applied technologies and aspen avionics are trying to meet our nation's 21st century challenges. even through the recent economic downturn, this local high-tech sector has remained strong, and even grown by hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue. yet, many small businesses cannot access the credit that they need to expand and higher more workers. mr. heinrich: this is why the congress must pass the small business jobs and credit act. this legislation will boost small business lending through community banks and provide tax relief, and it will do it
without adding a penny to the deficit. i'm doing all i can to support small businesses, which is why i urge my colleagues to support the small business jobs and credit act. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. olson: mr. speaker, as our economy continues to struggle, the president's former budget director, peter orszag, stated that, and i quote, higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending further depressing the already inadequate demand for what firms are capable of producing full tilt, end quote. in non-washington, d.c., language, that translates to the more money that government takes from the american people the less they have to spend and
to help rebuild our economy. my republican colleagues and i have been saying this for nearly two years. now, over 30 of my democrat colleagues have joined us in supporting an extension of all the tax cuts across the board. they get it. it makes no sense, no sense to raise taxes, especially at this time when businesses and individuals are trying to invest what little they have to make a better future and get our economy going. mr. speaker, let the american people keep their money. i urge house leadership to extend the 2001, 2003 tax cuts. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, it is widely understood that one
of the biggest problems facing our economy now is the fact that small businesses cannot get loans, and small business owners tell me every week from across my district they're not hiring because they cannot get loans and expand. in fact, a recent report from the joint economic committee, which i chair, found that the number of small business loans peaked in the second quarter of 2008 at 27 million loans. but since then the number of loans have fallen by 18%. the bill before the u.s. senate today that passed the house will address that by expanding access to needed credit for small businesses, providing tax relief and encouraging private investment. our economic recovery depends on small businesses and credit-worthy small businesses need loans. this bill is not a cure-all or a silver bullet but it is without question an important
step towards restoring and restarting the great american engine of growth. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, tomorrow is september 17, it's constitution day, a commemoration of the ratification of the u.s. constitution on september 17, 1787. the role of the federal government first debated by our founding fathers at the beginning of our new nation is still a topic of conversation over 200 years later. recently we have seen an explosive expansion of the federal government with the government takeover of health care, national interference in our schools and government control of our auto industry. power is being shifted from the people and the states to the federal government. the founders anticipated this dangerous growth of big government, so they drafted the
10th amendment to the constitution to ensure the federal government would only use powers granted specifically to them. as we take a moment today to remember the ratification, i hope we all remember that personal responsibility and less government intervention is a better way to promote liberty. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? without objection, so ordered. ms. chu: i rise today to honor a great man, dr. mario oblato. hailed as the godfather of latino movement, he dedicated his life to serving america's minority communities. as president of the league of united latin american citizens and founder of the national coalition of hispanic organizations, the hispanic national bar association, and
the mexican-american legal defense and educational fund, dr. oblato fought tirelessly for civil rights and justice. governments both here and abroad honored his accomplishments. he received the pregsdention -- presidential medal of freedom, the country's highest honor, and the highest tribute given by mexico to foreigners. he was an inspiration to many. i urge my house colleagues to join me in honoring dr. mario obla . to and his impact upon our country. he will be missed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. poe: mr. speaker, the constitution starts out, we the people. it's written in really large print right at the beginning of the document. the constitution is a rock, it's the foundation. it is not some abstract concept that changes depending on the social philosophy of the elite
and tyrants that are judges. the constitution says the things it says in plain, simple language. the constitution is an agreement between the people and the government. it sets limits on what the government can do, not the other way around. the constitution upholds the principle that people have god-given rights. government has no rights. government has power. and the more power it grabs, the less rights we have. thomas jefferson warned the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. a government big and powerful enough to control our lives is big and powerful enough to take away everything we have. and that's un-american. after all the constitution says, we the people. not we the subjects. that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. moran: mr. speaker, history is instructive on almost every
issue we face in this body. today's issue is whether we should take action so that the wealthiest americans don't have to pay at an income tax rate of 39.6%. so let's look back at when they were taxed at that rate during the clinton administration. well, what happened was exactly the opposite of what the republican party predicted would happen. in fact, people at that rate brought home more after-tax income than any time in american history. 22 million new jobs were created and we had record budget surplusings. in fact, at the end -- surpluses. in fact, at the end of this month we were projected to have paid off all of the debt. relieving our children and grandchildren of any of the debt that we would have otherwise burdened them with. alan greenspan was worried we didn't have enough debt, but instead we had a president who came in and in fact one of the
very first things he did was to try to finance two wars with two deep tax cuts and now we have $12 trillion of debt. let's look at the history and not go back to it. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? ms. ros-lehtinen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. ros-lehtinen: i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, i rise this morning to recognize and honor major edward j. hoodat jr. of the coral gables police department. he graduates tomorrow from the f.b.i.'s national academy at quantico. he was chosen by his chief to attend and by his class of 272 elite police executives to represent them. after the three-month training in terrorism protection and domestic crime investigation, ed says it is quite an honor to be
at the finest executive leadership course in the world. there have only been 44,000 of these top graduates since july 29, 1935 when j. edgar hoover created the f.b.i. police training academy. so congratulations to major ed hoodat, to his wife, and their lovely daughters. congratulations to the entire family. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? without objection, so ordered. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, secretary of health and human services seems shocked to find that placing new mandates on health insurers leads to increased cost. after press reports last week indicated that insurers are raising premiums because of obamacare, the secretary wrote a letter to the health insurance association which is nothing more than bullying.
the secretary called the measures under the carpet insisting there would be, quote, zero tolerance for misinformation and unjustified rate increases, end quote. why are these rate increases unjustified? because government bureaucrats thought that all the new rules and mandates would only lead to increases of 1% or 2%. now insurers functioning in the real world are increasing premiums by up to 9%. bullying and threats aren't going to make obamacare work. this unprecedented expansion of government powers overwhelm making health care more expensive. the solution is to repeal this law and replace it with real market-based reforms that take power away from un-elected government bureaucrats. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? >> mr. speaker, by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 61620 and ask
for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the bill. the clerk: house calendar number 236, house resolution 1620, resolved that at any time after the adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 4785, to amend the miscellaneous rural development provisions of the farm security and rural investment act of two, to authorize the secretary of agriculture to make loans to certain entities that will use the funds to make loans to consumers to implement energy efficiency measures involving structural improvements and investments and cost-effective commercial off-the-shelf technologies. the first readling of the bill -- reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21.
general debate shall be confined to the bill and amendments specified in this resolution and shall not exceed one hour equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on agriculture and the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. after general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on agriculture now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute prohibited in -- printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived except those aridesing under clause 10 of rule 21. notwithstanding clause 11 of rule 18, no amendment to that amendment gnat nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part b
of the report of the committee on rules. each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. shall not be subject to amendment. and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. all points of order against such amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, the chair may entertain a motion that the committee rise only if offered by the chair of the committee on agriculture or his designee. the chair may not entertain a
motion to strike out the enacting words of the bill as described in clause 9 of rule 18. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one hour. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from north carolina, dr. foxx. all time yielded during consideration of the rules is for debate only. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i also ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on house resolution 1620. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, h.res. 1620 provides for consideration of h.r. 4785, the rural energy savings program act. the rule provides one hour of general debate controlled by the committee on agriculture and energy and commerce. the rule makes in order as original texan amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part a of the rules committee report. and the rule also makes in order four amendments printed in part
b of the rules report and provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. mr. speaker, we all know that too many american families are unemployed. too many american families are having trouble paying their energy bills. too many of our manufacturing jobs have john overseas to china and other countries. -- have gone overseas to china and other countries. we have brought bill after bill after bill to the floor to had families weather these tough economic times and lake long-term investments and a clean economy so the united states maintains its status in the world as the leader in innovation. every time and every time we bring a bill to the floor, my friends on the other side of the aisle have overwhelmingly voted no. they have become the party of no. no to everything. unfortunately, based on some of the statements by some of my rules committee colleagues last night in the rules committee, i think that that will be their strategy today on this rural star bill. this is a good, cost-effective
bill. rural star will create high school, high-wage manufacturing and construction jobs while delivering energy savings to millions of americans by providing access to capital and energy efficient technologies. in fact, the national association of home builders endorsed this bill saying that h.r. 4785, and i quote, will save energy for american families, create jobs, and reap environmental rewards, end quote. i ask unanimous consent to insert the home builders letter of support into the record at the end of my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: let's not forget this bill will put people to work, keep good paying manufacturing jobs in the united states, and lower the utility bills of families and farms across the country. the truth is more than 92% of energy efficiency products are manufactured here in america. let me repeat that, mr. speaker. the truth is that more than 92% of energy efficiency products
are manufactured right here in the united states of america. we are talking about insulation, windows, doors, and water heaters. that's why this is so important. family or business will not only hire someone to install these energy efficiency products, but these products will be made in our backyard, right here in our own country. make it in america. that's what democrats want. that's what we stand for. there shouldn't be one member of this body who opposes putting americans to work in this fashion. and not only will h.r. 4785 result in more american jobs, it will lower families and farms' utility bills, this is particularly important in rural areas where customers are facing increasing costs for electric power. rural electric co-ops are facing for demand for electric power at a time when they are constrained from building new generation capacity. the gentleman from south carolina, mr. inglis, supports this bill because of the positive impacts on rural electric co-ops and said so
during the testimony last night. i want to thank mr. inglis for his report and putting american jobs over partisanship. to my colleagues who argue that this bill will cost too much, i want to remind them that the programs in this bill involve loans not grants. these loans must be repaid. c.b.o. has analyzed the legislation and concluded it does not score. the legislation is fully compliant with statutory pay-go and house pay-go rules. mr. speaker, i hope everyone will take a close look at the important provisions in the rural star bill that will put americans to work and help transition us to a stable, clean energy economy of tomorrow. i urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to put partisanship aside and support this rule and the underlying bill. i reserve the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise?
ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker, and i thank my colleague from massachusetts for yielding time but, mr. speaker, unfortunately i have to rise today in opposition to this rule and the underlying bill. even though we've all had the opportunity to meet with our constituents in our districts over the past six weeks, it's clear that the ruling democrat elite still do not seem to get it. my constituents in north carolina want the federal government to stop spending, but this bill authorizes an additional $5 billion for two new government-funded energy efficiency loan program. mr. speaker, the so-called stimulus in 2009, including -- included over $8 billion in taxpayer dollars that were supposedly meant for energy efficiency in homes. at the time the ruling democrats boasted that it authorized $4.7 billion for the department of energy to issue
grants for a home weatherization program. however, though, it was touted as another shovel-ready program. the department of energy has used less than 10% of those funds in the program's first year. just over 30,000 homes were weatherized instead of the hundreds of thousands promised. if the department of energy can't implement the $4.7 billion in the stimulus, why should we authorize another $5 billion loan program? we've not seen any evidence of these programs working on being implemented correctly. mr. speaker, apparently the $8 billion in stimulus spending was not enough. the democrats are now asking that we borrow another $5 billion from foreign countries and our grandchildren. the fact is we cannot afford nor do we need these new government programs, especially at a time when we have unprecedented deficit and the return on this spending is un-- is questionable at best.
furthermore, this bill was not vetted by both the committees to which it was referred. and it's remarkable that our colleagues continue to bring ideas that have been rejected back to the floor. the rules committee democrats have issued the self-executing rule to arbitrarily force inclusion of the home star energy efficiency loan program into the bill even though 346 members, including 178 democrats, already voted against it this past may. they're using blunt force to push their agenda through, ignoring the will of the american people by increasing the program's authorization level from its original $324 million to a whooping $4.25 billion. again, mr. speaker, i'm disappointed that after having six weeks at home to listen to their constituents, not just democrats constituents, not just republican constituents, not just independent or
unaffiliated, but folks from all areas of political persuasion. their constituents don't want them to spend more of their hard-earned money on frivolous government programs. instead, they want us to cut spending, lower their taxes and enable businesses to prosper so they can get back to work. the goals of these two government programs -- new programs could be achieved by existing programs such as the rural economic development loan and grant program which controlled approximately $33.7 million for loans in fiscal 2010. why two new programs are being created to do something an existing program can already achieve is beyond me. finally, i object to this rule because it is once again a structured rule. the ruling democrat elites have chosen to block at least nine amendments from being offered on the floor today and instead have ash trearl chosen to a--
arbitrarily chosen to allow four which are the only amendments they will permit us to debate. understand again, mr. speaker, after promising the most open and honest congress in history, speaker pelosi has gone back on her word and against the will of the american people. when will our colleagues across the aisle learn that this house belongs to the people, not to them? and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i'm sorry that the gentlewoman from north carolina has a problem with american jobs. but 92% of the products that have been used in this weatherization process was made here in the united states of america. we're helping to keep jobs and helping to create jobs. i'm sorry that the party of no has a problem with that. but the democratic party believes that we need to make it in america and that we need to invest in american jobs and
not only keep american jobs but add american jobs. the gentlelady says that somehow the weatherization program in the recovery and reinvestment act didn't work. well, i disagree with her strongly. in some states like north carolina weatherization got off to a slow start but other states like massachusetts we're able to start quickly. this was a function of the state having weatherization programs ready to handle these new funds right away or if they had to be ramped up. today over 30,000 homes each month are being weatherized across the country thanks to the recovery and reinvestment act. in 2009 1,100 more homes were weatherized in massachusetts than in north carolina. but in april, may and june of this year, 1,000 more houses were weatherized in north carolina than in massachusetts. today, nearly the same number of houses have been weatherized both in north carolina and in massachusetts. so to say that this program
isn't working and that it's a failure is clearly and utterly a mischaracterization. i hope that my colleagues would look at the facts and not demagogue this issue simply for political gain. those projects on weatherization, i'll say to my colleague from north carolina, in her state are helping keep -- helping to keep people in their jobs and helping to create more jobs. why is that such a big problem to my friends on the republican side of the aisle? why do they have a problem with making things here in the united states of america and protecting american jobs? that's one of the best reasons to support this bill. in addition to saving utility costs for families and small businesses, it's about creating jobs in the united states of america. mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for three minutes.
mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker, and i appreciate my friend from massachusetts permitting me to speak on this. i could not agree with him more. i did spend a month working in oregon to deal with people who are concerned about the economy. i had a meeting just last friday with over 200 people, including executives, presidents of two of our local electric utilities. i met with electrical contractors. i've met with utility contractors, with unemployed union workers. mr. speaker, i will tell you not only is the initiative that under the recovery act putting people to work in connecticut -- in north carolina and in massachusetts, it's putting people to work in oregon. but what is important here is building on that model to be able to extend it to more home builders, more contractors,
other utilities. there is the potential here to employ 168,000 people over the course of the next two years. now, i come from a region that has invested heavily in energy efficiency. we have been able to save hundreds of millions of dollars of investment because we are getting more out of the energy we have now. the good news is the products that are energy efficient are largely made in america, and they are very labor intensive. these are installing new windows, installing weatherization, installing more efficient appliances, heating and cooling. this is saving money for years to come for families while it's putting families to work now. an important part of this legislation is that it will
empower electric cooperatives which provide energy to many in my state and across the country. to help customers reduce energy use and cost. this bill was amended to include the home star energy efficiency so it helps people in the 88% of the country that are not served by electrical co-ops. all americans should have access to these low-cost home improvement loans to save energy and save money. and it has a terrific mechanism of working with the utilities, public and private utilities and allowing people to pay it back on a monthly basis through their energy bills which are going to be reduced. for many people it's not going to actually cost them anything over the course of the next five years, and it will save them money for years and years to come every month with that
utility. it's why it puts american people back to work now. it's why energy companies and others combine to support this legislation. i am baffled by my friends on the other side of the aisle didn't hear from people at home like i heard from who want this opportunity to work in america, to save energy and put people back to work. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. there's an old saying, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. what this bill does again is bring up what is a sort of a mini stimulus bill. we were told when the stimulus bill was passed unemployment wouldn't go above 8%.
it would create jobs. it would be the great boom for the country. we now have 9.6% unemployment. i'm a member of an electric co-op. i know very well how electric co-ops work. if they wanted to do this, if it was such a great deal, they would do it. we don't need the federal government doing this because everything that our friends have promised has failed,
who were delinquent on their taxes and i quote from the manager's amendment that a loan shall not be provided to a federal employee under this act. one that the employee has seriously delinquent tax debt. so everybody should pay their taxes and we all should be concerned about the debt and deficit. but you find it a little bit astonishing that the parties that took a surplus that bill clinton gave them and turned it into record deficits is talking about the importance of reducing our deficit. dick cheney, i remember the vice president of the united states, i see he made the statement that deficits don't matter. i strong will i disagree with him. of course chaney it doesn't make any difference. now they are complaining about the size of the tow truck. get us back on the road. you know, mr. speaker, i think the american people are not
going to be fooled. i also find it a little bit astonishing that, again, while my friends are talking about the importance to focus on the deficit that they have embraced a tax plan that will double the projected deficit by adding $4 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. what they are trying to do is make sure that millionaires and above get at least $100,000 in tax breaks. that's where their priorities are. the purpose of this bill is to not only help families lower their utility costs, the purpose of this bill is to create american jobs. and to buy products made in the united states of america. not buy them from china, not buy them from india or some other country. but made here in the united states. i'm sorry that my colleague from north carolina doesn't believe that the jobs that were created in her district as a result of the weatherization investment
and the reinvestment and recovery act somehow don't matter. they do. people are working. they are supporting their families. we need to do more of that. we need to invest in the american people and american economy. and i should also point out so there is no mistake this is not additional spending. what this is is a loan program. this is not adding one cent to our deficit. this is a loan program where people will pay the loans back. c.b.o. said it doesn't score. it is totally client with pay-go. -- come pliant with pay-go -- come pliant -- compliant with pay-go. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. here we go again. my colleagues across the aisle always want to talk about this wonderful surplus that president clinton had. they always negligent to mention that congress holds the
pursestrings and it was republicans who were in charge of the congress when mr. clin ton, the last six years of mr. clinton's administration. they were in terrible shape the first two years. republicans took over. and we, republicans, brought the economy to a surplus. they also like to point out how bad it was when president bush left always. they always negligent to say you were in charge, mr. speaker, and your party when mr. bush left office. you drove the american economy into the ditch. not the republicans. everything, every bill that comes up here is to create jobs. but the american people understand again, everything you have done has failed. from the stimulus february a year ago to now, you want to continue to spend money to create jobs. the government overwhelm creates government jobs not jobs in the
private sector. so i can't let my colleague get by with that. i would now like to yield three minutes to the sponsor of this bill, mr. chaffetz, from utah, and point out that the item that mr. -- our colleague from massachusetts pointed out is such a narrow piece, we want to really do something about federal employees paying their taxes, not just those who might apply for a loan under this program. mr. chaffetz, i yield you three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for three minutes. mr. chaffetz: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding. we have so many good federal workers who wake up every morning, do good jobs, they go to work, they are working hard to make this country great, we applaud them for that effort. unfortunately there is a small percentage of people who are not doing what they are supposed to be doing. but it happens to be that nearly $100,000 federal workers are not paying about $1 billion a year
in taxes. the proposal that we will be able to vote on today would allow us to mandate and make sure that federal workers who founded this category of serious delinquent tax debt are fired if they don't pay their taxes, the principle is simple. if they are on the federal payroll, we should be paying -- we are halfway to actually making hole. then, fine. we are obviously, according to the data -- you are taking the taxpayer dollars, you should be paying your taxes. interestingly enough, on january 20th of this year, president obama had a speech and he was talking about federal contractors. i want you to listen to the words of the president who i happen to agree with in this case. but i also want you to think when they say federal contractor, they should also say federal worker. quote, from president obama, it
is simply wrong for companies to take taxpayer dollars and not be taxpayers themselves. we need to insist on the same sets of responsibility in washington that so many of you strive to uphold in your lives, families shall and businesses. he went on to say, quote, all across the country there are people who meet their obligationings each and every day. you do your job, you support your families, you pay the taxes you owe because it is fundamental responsibility of citizenship. and yet somehow it has become standard practice in washington to give contracts to companies that don't pay their taxes. mr. president, the president is right. but it's everywhere that it says federal contractors, it should also say federal employees. this is a simple, this should be bipartisan. everybody should unite behind this because, unfortunately, there are too many people that are on the federal -- on the payroll, they are taking taxpayer dollars, but they are not paying their fair share. they have good quality high-paying jobs. please, support this measure as it comes up today and let's do
the right thing. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. just a couple things. i'll remind the gentlelady from north carolina, what dug us into this ditch were tax cuts for the rich that weren't paid for. two wars that weren't paid for. and a medicare prescription drug bill that was like five times the cost we were told it was and it wasn't paid for. so let's get the record straight on that. and i got to say, mr. speaker, the hypocrisy of the republican party just takes my breath away. when they get up here and talk about the responsibility that individuals have to pay their factions. where were they? where were they when we -- when we tried to crack down on companies that opened up p.o. boxes in bermuda and the kaymen islands to avoid paying u.s. taxes? operating here in the united states and get u.s. government money, where were they?
the republicans voted 170-1 to protect tax breaks for companies shipping american jobs overseas. 95% of house republicans have signed a pledge to protect these tax rates. that's where they are. they are on the side -- they want to protect these big corporations that escape paying u.s. taxes, but they want to go after somebody who is working at n.i.h. as a researcher trying to find a cure to cancer. let's focus on those people. that's what they say. look, the point of this legislation here is jobs. so it's saving families and farms, small businesses, utility costs, and it's about creating american jobs. it's about buying things here and -- it's about buying things here in the united states of america. why is that so objectionable to the republicans? why are they fighting this bill that will invest in our economy, that will invest in american jobs, that will help protect
american jobs and create more american jobs. why is this so controversial? why do they insist that we need to have an economy where we buy everything from china? what democrats are trying to do is to steer this economy toward making it here in america. making these products in america, investing in american jobs. that's what this is all about. so rather than protecting tax breaks for corporations that escape paying u.s. taxes, and get incentivized to move jobs overseas, how about standing up to the american worker? how about standing up for this concept of make it in america and creating and expanding jobs here in the united states. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to point out a couple of things to my colleague from massachusetts. what's sending jobs overseas are things like the government takeover of health care in this country which is creating such
uncertainty and which is driving up the cost of health care for everyone. the rules and regulations established by the e.p.a. and the programs that our colleagues across the aisle love so much. they constantly talk about tax cuts for the rich. every american got a duct when the tax cuts went into effect. the tax rate for the lowest income americans went down from 15% to 10%. now they are proposing to allow that to go back up on january 1 and create the largest tax increase in the history of this country. it sounds to me like my colleagues across the aisle is defending federal employees from not paying their taxes. i find that really difficult to understand. i'd now like to yield a minute to my colleague from utah for some further discussion of this issue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for one minute. mr. chaffetz: thank you, madam
speaker. where was i? where was i? i'm just a freshman here. i didn't create this mess, but i am here to help clean it up. i stand with some democrats and the president in supporting the idea and notion that if you're a federal contractor and don't pay your taxes, you should be dismissed. you shouldn't get a contract. but let's have the guts to have that same standard for federal employees. that's where the hypocrisy comes in because the president was very clear, i read his comments, about taking care of federal contractors. the same standard should apply to the federal employees. to suggest that, well, go ahead and give them a grant and special exemptions. absolutely not. i think we need to hold them to a higher standard. do the same for contractors and federal employees. that's the right thing to do. like i said, i didn't create this mess but we are here to help clean it up. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i would say to the gentleman and my friends on the other side of
the aisle they have all been long enough here to add to the mess. cleaning up the mess meaning supporting bills like this that will create american jobs, that will protect american jobs. this is an important bill. again, for the life of me i don't understand why there is controversy over a bill to invest in america. invest in our workers. to help lower utility costs for small businesses, for individuals, for family farms. there's no -- this is not adding to our deficit one penny. this is a loan program to help people weatherize their homes. mobile home, farm, or small business. over 90% of what is needed to do that is made in america. why is that a problem? why do you have a problem with investing in programs that create american jobs? that's what this is about. again, the republicans voted 170-1 to protect tax breaks for companies shipping american jobs
overseas. 95% of the house republicans have signed a pledge to protect these tax breaks. enough of that. it's time to invest in american workers. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. the reason republicans vote against these programs is because we pay attention to what happens. government programs don't work. it's real simple. our colleagues across the aisle simply haven't learned that. again, we go back to the stimulus. we were promised unemployment would not go up past 8%. it's almost 10%. our economy's in the ditch. we are in terrible, terrible shape in this country. all because of spending by our colleagues across the aisle and the belief in the government is our savior. it is not our savior. i now would like to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from virginia, mr.
cantor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. cantor: i thank the gentlelady. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the rule and the motion to previous question. i do so because this summer while members were back home in their districts they heard the growing frustration of the american people firsthand. hardworking americans can see that our nation is at a crossroads. we have a $13 trillion national debt. that works out to be $42,000 for every man, woman, and child in america. and what is the democratic majority doing today? they are bringing a bill to the floor to spend another $5 billion that we don't have. to continue their failed stimulus policies. all the while the american people are saying that the rampant federal spending in washington has to stop.
and the people are speaking out through the youcut program with over 1.7 million votes. the youcut movement continues to encourage people of all stribes to go online and take an active role in determining how their government spends taxpayer dollars. youcut voters have helped republicans bring to the floor more than $120 billion in spending cuts. only to be blocked every time by the speaker an the democratic majority. this week's winning proposal under the youcut program is an idea put forward by the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, to acquire the collection -- require the collection of unpaid tax from federal employees. while all americans have an obligation to pay the taxes they owe, federal employees can be seen especially obliged to pay their share of the taxes because they draw their compensation from the american taxpayers. .
addressing our staggering national debt is not a partisan calling, mr. speaker. it's a national imperative, and i urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote to bring this week's youcut proposal to the house floor, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, let me just say that, remind me what we're debating here, a bill that costs nothing, does nothing to our deficit, that will invest in american jobs, invest in american products, versus the republicans' plan, add $2 trillion to our deficit. that's what this is about here. i hear frustration from people back at home all the time. what they want is they want a manufacturing strategy. they want a strategy to help expand and create more american jobs. they want to close tax loopholes that encourage
outsourcing u.s. jobs overseas. they want us to provide hometown tax credits to help small businesses hire new employees and sell their innovation overseas. they want to boost incentives to create american clean energy jobs like making state-of-the-art wind turbines, end corporate welfare to big oil. they want to strengthen rules that -- that u.s. and its contractors by products made here in america, especially to build transportation and energy and communication infrastructure. they're tired -- they're tired of us shipping those jobs overseas and importing everything. they want to make it here in america. they want us to force china and other countries to honor fair trade principles or lose american business. there ought to be a consequence if a country like china abrogates its obligations to a treaty or to a trade bill. we need to give incentives to hire and retain america's returning veterans for new
clean energy jobs and we need to strengthen partnerships with businesses to retain america's workers for jobs of the future. that's what the american people want. the frustration is, why are we importing everything from overseas? why are you giving tax breaks to corporations that move their operations overseas or hire overseas? we have an unemployment problem here in the united states. what the american people are frustrated about is that we're losing american jobs that really quite frankly should be made here in america. so i hear the frustration, but i would say the answer is not adding $4 trillion to our deficit like they want to do. the answer is in supporting programs like this that don't add a cent to our deficit but will create american jobs. and i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves his time. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished
ranking member of the rules committee, mr. dreier. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. dreier: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i listen to my colleague from worcester talk about the unemployment rate, talk about the economic challenges that we're facing, and i can tell you we all are well aware of it. part of the area i represent in southern california has a 14% unemployment rate. statewide in california, we have in excess of nearly 12.5% unemployment rate. people are hurting and let's remember, we were promised when the proposals that came forward from this administration that we would have an unemployment rate that would not exceed 8%. and now as my friend from grandfather community said we have an unemployment rate that
that in a partisan way. i'm saying it because the republicans represent nearly half the american people and the american people are the ones who are being shut out and unfortunately the democratic members are being shut out as well. this has tragically been the single most closed congress in the history of our republican. the 221-year history of our republic as never seen a congress as closed as this. i know this comes as a surprise
to many, but with the exception of the appropriations process in the first two years of speaker -- speaker pelosi's leadership, we have seen a grand total of one bill considered under an opening -- open amendment process in the entire three years. in fact, we are poised right now to for the first time in the history of our republic see an entire congress without a single open rule. why? because we saw the appropriations process closed down in this 111th congress as well. the american people want us to focus on job creation and economic growth, and they also want greater transparency, disclosure, and accountability. mr. speaker, they are not getting that from this congress. they deserve better and if we can deliver it, i'm convinced we'll be able to get our economy back on track. . i ask my colleagues to vote no
on this rule. vote no on the previous question so we can say to the federal employees not paying their taxes they should not be there. we're focusing specifically on ways to cut spending. we have an opportunity to do that. let's vote no on the previous question, not on the rule. with that i yield back the balance of my time. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, how much time do i have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts has 11 minutes remaining. and the gentlelady from north carolina has 10 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, the previous speaker used the word arrogance, and i would just say that i think it's offly -- offly arrogant for members to stand up -- awfully arrogant for members to stand up and vote against bills that provide loans and lending abilities to small businesses. i mean, small business is the
engine of our economy. and the bill that we're talking about here today will help a lot of small businesses. we had a small business bill on the floor that we passed. unfortunately, my friends on the other side of the aisle voted against it and i'm told that the senate is going to be taking it up shortly. but we'll provide additional credit to small businesses which is desperately needed. i think my colleagues that went home over the break talked to a number of small businesses and access to credit is a big issue. i think we're probably going to get it. took a long time, fight to get it but my republican friends, the party of no on the other side of the aisle, voted against it. so you want to talk about arrogance, i think that's arrogant. this bill before us will provide loans that will help create energy-efficient products made here in the united states of america and will also help fund the installation of these products by american workers.
this is about creating jobs. we are going to make it in america and create american jobs. that, my friends on the other side of the aisle find that controversial or unacceptable. it's just astounding to me. and when i hear that the money in the recovery and reinvestment act didn't create any jobs when it comes to the issue of weatherization and energy efficiency, again, i read the statistics. the statistics don't lie. i mean, jobs were created. and many houses have been made more energy efficient which means that individuals and businesses don't have to pay as much in utility bills and that's an important thing for a small business or a struggling family. so this is about american jobs. it's about investing in the american people. and i would just say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, rather than voting overwhelmingly 170-1 to protect tax breaks for companies shipping american jobs overseas, you ought to focus on
ways to help keep american jobs here in the united states of america. and that's what we're trying to do with this bill. i urge all my colleagues to put -- don't put politics above people. don't put politics above people. do what's right and let's help create more jobs in the united states of america. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. with all due respect to my colleague across the aisle, we do not put politics above people. my colleagues and i were out in our districts all during the august recess, and we listened to our constituents. we know what our constituents want. they want a different direction for this country than our friends across the aisle have been taking us, along with the administration. it wasn't the republicans that drove this country into the
ditch. it was the democrats. through their spend, spend, spend program, debt, debt, debt program. the american people have awakened. they know what's going on and they don't like it. we're going to do everything we can to stop this irresponsible behavior on the part of our colleagues. mr. speaker, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. our colleagues have talked about every bill they brought up here in the last 18 months as being a jobs bill. but what they've done is spend, spend, spend and claiming they're creating jobs but they've failed time after time. the results are clear. the democrat elite have run out of ideas about how to get the economy moving in the right direction. the american people can't afford more of the ruling democrats' failed policies.
they want new ideas for getting our economy back on track. not the same warmed over stimulus and bailout policies that have failed to do anything but create new taxes, record deficits and high unemployment. month after month, americans have been asking, where are the jobs? the democrats have been in total control of this country for almost two years, and what does president obama offer? nothing new but promising between now and november he will, "remind the american people that policies he has put in place has moved us in the right direction." well, good luck, mr. president, on telling the american people you've taken us from 5% unemployment to 10% unemployment and you want to keep going in the same direction. those who are unemployed aren't going to agree, and those who worry about being unemployed aren't going to agree with the president. the american people do not need more empty rhetoric and
politically driven spin from the white house. they need real solutions. the only job this administration has created is federal government jobs, adding to the overwhelming layers of bureaucracy that already exist at the federal level. from february of 2009 to june, 2010, 405,000 federal jobs have been created. since the so-called stimulus, american taxpayers have spent $44.9 billion on these new government worker salaries. and yet we continue to see record unemployment for the private sector. all the elites want to do is grow government, grow bureaucracy and this is evidence by their backward policy. as they try to sell their recovery summer, we know that more americans are concerned about the state of the economic health. . a reuters poll showed the economy is a concern for the americans with almost 72% of
americans very concerned about jobs. it shows 62% of americans now think the country is on the wrong track. it's clear that though president obama believes he's sailing the ship in the right direction, the american people overwhelmingly disagree. even though the results are in and it's clear the american people don't want these policies, our friends across the aisle keep trying to shove expensive wasteful pieces of legislation down the taxpayers' throat. mr. speaker, the american people deserve better than this. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: we have no further speakers. i ask the gentlelady whether she has any additional speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina. mr. mcgovern: she can close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous
consent that the text of the amendment to which we -- our colleagues spoke earlier and extraneous material be placed in the record prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i'm going to urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question so i can amend the rule to allow all members of congress the opportunity to vote on a cost saving measure. recently republican chip eric cantor launched youcut which gives people an opportunity to vote for federal spending they'd like to see congress cut. americans have cast their votes and this week the american people want congress to save nearly $1 billion by requiring collection of unpaid taxes from federal employees. in 2008, the internal revenue service reported that over 97,000 federal employees were delinquent on their federal income taxes on a total of $1 billion in unpaid taxes.
this includes 1,151 employees who owe $7 million at the department of treasury which oversees the i.r.s. h.r. 4735 which i'm a co-sponsor would prevent persons with seriously delinquent tax debts being eligible for federal employment by requiring the minimum the i.r.s. work with federal agencies to withhold a portion of each employee's paycheck who is determined to have a, quote, seriously delinquent tax debt, end quote, we can ensure that federal employees are paying their fair share of taxes. failure to pay required taxes should result in disciplinary actions designed to ensure taxpayers are made whole. in addition to collecting back taxes already due, this reform will ensure future unpaid taxes are also collected. again i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question, no on the rule. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina yields back the balance of her time. mr. mcgovern: how much time
remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts has 8 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. mcgone: mr. speaker, i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: once again i urge my colleagues not to put politics over people. these are serious difficulty economic times. we need to make policy here that invests in our people, that invests in american jobs, that helps create a climate where more american jobs can be created. my colleague from north carolina talks about how the republicans somehow are not responsible for this massive, colossal deficit that we have. i just want to remind people about the facts. the facts are that when bill clinton provided george bush with his record breaking surplus, it was a republican congress and republican president that instituted tax cuts, mostly for the wealthy, that weren't paid for.
and tax cuts that benefited the wealthiest of the wealthy that were not paid for. it was a prescription drug bill that wasn't paid for and was much more expensive than they advertised. it was two wars that they decided not to pay for. american soldiers and their families sacrifice, but the rest of us are asked to not do anything to help sacrifice or pay for the war. that all happened when you had a republican congress who were in control of everything and republican president. those are the facts. i'm sorry that it bothers my friends, but it's the truth. and now they are coming up with a proposal that will add $4 trillion to our deficit. and doesn't need to bother any of them. it bothers me and the people that i represent. i think it bothers most people in this country. one of the things that i think is clear is that the american people don't want to go back to
the same old policies that created this mess. mr. speaker, president bush holds the worst jobs record of any administration in 75 years. including 4.6 million american manufacturing jobs lost. house republican leaders have said, and i quote, we need to go back to the exact same agenda. that's what they want to do. they want to go back to the same policies that created this mess. i repeat -- i'm going to repeat what i said before about the fact that republicans voted 170-1 to protect tax breaks for companies shipping american jobs overseas. 170-1 to protect tax breaks that are shipping our jobs overseas. 95% of house republicans have signed a pledge to protect these tax breaks. what are they thinking? 100% of house republicans voted against creating and saving 3.6 million american jobs, including
advance vehicle and clean energy manufacturing jobs. we cannot go back. we cannot go back. when we make it in america, more middle class families will make it, too. it's that simple. and what the underlying bill does is provide loans. it doesn't add a single cent to our deficit t provides loans to families and businesses and farms to be able to do weatherization and energy efficiency. over 90% of the products that are needed to do energy efficiency improvement are made in america. not made in china. made in america. this is a good thing. and the more people take loans and the more people want to weatherize their homes and their businesses they will save money on utility costs and more and more american workers will get a job. why is that so hard for my friends on the other side of the
aisle to get. they fight tooth and nail to provide tax breaks for billionaires and millionaires. it doesn't do a damn thing for american workers. and we need to start insisting that american workers come first. this is what this bill is about. it's about making it here in the united states. creating jobs in the united states. so, mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote -- support this bill. i would urge a yes vote on the previous question. and on the rule. and i yield back the balance of my time. i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts yields back the balance of his time. the question is on ordering the previous question. on the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no.
in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen. the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be followed by five-minute votes on adoption of the house resolution 1620, if ordered, and the motion to suspend the rules on senate amendment to h.r. 3562. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 226. the nays are 186. the previous question is ordered. the question is on the adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, -- ms. foxx: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina. ms. foxx: on that i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those in favor -- those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 225, the nays are 188. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the resolution adopted. -- is adopted. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentlewoman from texas, ms. johnson, to suspend the rules and concur with the senate amendment to h.r. 3562 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3562, an act to
designate the federally occupied building located at 1220 echelon parkway in jackson, mississippi, as the james chaney, andrew goodman and michael schwerner federal building. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendment. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 409 and the nays are zero. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the senate amendments are agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise?
>> madam speaker, pursuant to clause 2-a-1 of rule 9 i hereby notify the house of my intention to offer a resolution as a question of the privileges of the house. mr. price: the form of my resolution is as follows. whereas a reconvening of congress between the regularly scheduled federal election in november and the start of the next session of congress is known as the lame duck session of congress. whereas democrats have recently insinuated that significant legislative matters would deliberately not be addressed during the 111th congress, until after the midterm 2010 elections. whereas this congress began its morgue of the nation's future with a, quote, stimulus package, unquote, costing $1.1 trillion that failed to lower employment, spur economic growth or address the needs of a struggling american businesses and families. whereas this congress continued its free-wheeling spending with
an increase of $72.4 billion in nonemergency discretionary spending in fiscal year 2009 to reach a total spending level of $1.01 trillion for the first time in united states history. whereas this congress approved a budget resolution in 2009 that proposed the sixth largest nominal deficits in american history and included tax increases of $423 billion during a period of sustained high unemployment. whereas the house of representatives disregarded the interests and opinions of everyday americans by passing a national energy tax bill that wine crease costs on nearly every aspect of -- that would increase costs on nearly every aspect of american lives, eliminate millions of jobs, reduce workers' income and devastate economic growth.
whereas this congress disregarded the interests and opinions of everyday americans by passing a massive government takeover of health care that will force millions of americans from their health insurance plans, increase premiums and costs for individuals and employers, raise tax by $569.2 billion all at a cost of $2.264 trillion over the first 10 years of full i. mentation. whereas this congress nationalized the student loan industry with a potential cost of 30,000 private sector jobs and $50.1 billion over 10 years. whereas the house of representatives passed the disclose act which would violate the first amendment and hinder the free speech of citizens, associations and corporations while leaving all unions exempt from many of the new
requirements in order to try to influence the outcome of the midterm 2010 elections. whereas in spite of the house budget committee chairman's 2006 statement that, quote, if you can't budget you can't govern, unquote, the democrat leadership has failed to introduce a budget resolution in 2010 as mandated by law, but instead self-executed a, quote, deeming resolution, unquote, that increases nonemergency discretionary spending in fiscal year 2011 by $30 billion to $1.121 trillion, setting another new record. for the highest level in united states history. .. whereas this congress has failed main street through passage of a financial system takeover that fails to end the moral hazard of too big to fail does not address fannie mae and freddie mac, and creates numerous new boards and
councils and position was unconstitutionally broad authorities that will interfere with the creation of wealth and jobs. whereas this congress has wasted taxpayer funds on an unnecessary and unconstitutional auto industry bailout, a cash for clunkers program, a home remodification program called cash for kaulkers and countless other special interest projects while allowing the public debt reach the highest level in united states history. whereas "the new york times" reported on june 19, 2010, that, quote, for all the focus on the historic federal rescue of the banking industry, it is the government's decision to seize fannie mae and freddie mac in september, 2008, that is likely to cost taxpayers the most money. republicans want to sever ties with fannie and freddie once the crisis abates, the obama administration and congressional democrats have insisted on postponing the argument until
after the midterm elections, unquote. whereas the "washington times" reported on june 22, 2010, that house majority leader steny hoyer stated, quote, a budget which sets out binding one-year targets and a multiyear plan is useless this year because congress has shunted key questions about deficits to the independent debt commission created by president obama which is due to report back at the end of this year, unquote. whereas the hill reported on june 24, 2010, that senator tom harkin, a democrat from iowa, suggested that, quote, democrats might attempt to move card check legislation this year perhaps during a lame duck session, a lot of things can happen in a lame duck session, too, he said. whereas "the new york times" published an article on june 28, 2010, titled lame duck session emerges as possibility for
climate bill conference that declares, quote, many expect the final energy or climate bill to be worked out during the lame duck session between the november election and the start of the new congress in january. whereas the hill reported on july 1, 2010, the democratic leaders are likely to punt the task of renewing you bush era tax cuts after the november election. voters will be left without a clear idea of the future tax rates when they go to the polls, unquote. whereas the "wall street journal" reported on july 13, 20 10 that, quote, there have been signs in recent weeks that party leaders are planning an ambitious lame duck session to muscle through bills in december that they don't want to defend before november. retiring or defeated members of congress would then be able to vote for sweeping legislation without any fear of voter evaluation, unquote.
whereas the hill reported on july 27, 2010, that senate majority leader harry reid said at a recent conference of liberal bloggers in reference to democrats' unfinished priorities, quote, we are going to have a lame duck session so we are not giving up, unquote. whereas the hill reported in the same piece on july 27, 2010, that the lame duck session will include priorities such as, quote, comprehensive immigration reform, climate change legislation, and a whole host of other issues, unquote. whereas during nbc's' meet the press on august 8, 2010, white house advisor carol browner stated that congress would, quote, potentially, unquote, deal with a national energy tax bill in a limb duck session. -- lame duck session. whereas the hill reported on august 20, 2010 that representative mike quigley of illinois said, quote, i'm more hopeful about the lame duck
session. i have faith that we are going to repeal don't-ask, don't-tell, unquote. whereas, the members of the house republican conference as an alternative to passing massive omnibus spending bills for next year during the lame duck session have called on members of both parties as a starting point to work together this month to enact legislation that cuts nonsecurity discretionary spending to 2008 levels. the last year before the wave of bailouts and stimulus spending sprees and takeovers that have dismayed the american people. for the next year and provides much needed certainty to american businesses by freezing tax rates at their current level for the next two years. whereas recent public polling suggests that the american people clearly oppose the idea of dealing with new major legislation in a lame duck session. whereas the declaration of independent notes that, quote, governments derive their just powers from the consent of the gotsched, unquote. whereas the american people have
expressed their loss of confidence through self-organized and self-funded taxpayer marches on washington at countless tea party events, town halls, and speeches, and with numerous letters and emails and phone calls to their elected representatives. whereas the democrat majority has all but announced plans to use any lame duck congress to advance currently unattainable partisan policies that are widely unpopular with the american people or that further increase the national debt against the will of most americans. whereas, reconvening the house of representatives in a lame duck session to address major new legislation subverts the will of the american people, lessens accountability, and does lasting damage to the dignity and integrity of this body's proceedings. and whereas, under the leadership of speaker pelosi and the democrat majority, and largely due to the current trends of expanding governmental power and limiting individual liberty, the american people have lost confidence in their elected officials and that faith
must be restored. now therefore, be it resolved that the house of representatives pledges not to assemble on or between november 2, 2010, and january 3, 2011 except in the case of an unforeseen sudden emergency requiring immediate action from congress and that the consideration of any of the following matters does not constitute an unforeseen sudden emergency. one, card check, including h.r. 1409. two, a national energy tax, including h.r. 2454. three, any legislation that would provide more authority to fannie mae and freddie mac. four, any legislation pertaining to the immigration and national act. five, any legislation making regular appropriations for fiscal year 2011 that would be an increase over previous funding levels. and six, any legislation increasing any tax on any
american. the speaker pro tempore: under rule 9 the resolution offered from the floor by a member other than the majority leader or the minority leader as a question of the privileges of the house has immediate precedence only as a time designated by the chair within two legislative days after the resolution is properly noticed. pending that designation, the form of the resolution noticed by the gentleman from georgia will appear in the record at this point. the chair will not at this point determine whether the resolution constitutes a question of privilege. that determination will be made at the timez designated for consideration of the resolution. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and açó and include any extraneous material on h.r. 4785. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, madam speaker.
1620, and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole on the state of the union for the consideration ofól h.r. 4875. the chair appointments the gentleman from colorado, mr. salazar, to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of ths$? 5s for the consideration of h.r. 4785 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to amend the miscellaneous rural development provisions of the farm security and rural investment act of 2002
to authorize the secretary of agriculture to make loans to certain entities that will use the funds to make loans to consumers to implement energy efficiency measures involving structural improvements and investments in cost-effective commercial off-the-shelf technologies to reduce home energy use. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. general debate shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on agriculture and the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. holden, the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lucas, the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, and the gentleman from texas, mr. martin, each will control 15 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. holden. mr. holden: thank you, mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. holden: thank you, mr. speaker. the bill we are considering today, h.r. 4785, the rural energy savings program act, will greatly benefit our rural
residents. the agriculture provisions in this bill on existing u.s. department agriculture program will reduce energy consumption and as a result reduce energy costs in rural america. rural electric cooperatives estimate that the rural energy savings program act has the potential to create between 20,000 and 40,000 jobs per year and will make loans available to between $1.1 -- 1.1 million and 1.6 million households. it is clear that this is a win-win proposition for our rural constituents and our rural economy. this act furthers the agriculture committee's commitment to expand renewable and alternative sources of power and discover new technologies to improve the efficiency and sustainability of existing power generation across rural america. h.r. 4785 authorizes usda's rural utility service to make interest-free loans to eligible
entities. these entities will use these funds to make low-interest loans to rural consumers, allowing them to implement energy efishen measures on their property. using the existing rural utility service structure with rural electric cooperatives as the delivery system, consumers can more quickly obtain the benefits of energy efishen investment and ultimately increase their -- decrease their energy bills. rural customers are facing increasing energy costs and they would serve 42 million member owners across the country are facing growing demand for electric power. yet are constrained from building new generation capacity. the up-front costs to make energy efficient upgrades are often beyond the reach of most consumers. this is true even if the cost can be recovered over time or tax credit or rebate would reduce the initial price. additionally, consumers often lack the necessary knowledge about what technologies would be the most effective. h.r. 4785 is an opportunity to meet these challenges and enact
policy that we know will reduce energy costs and consumption and improve the quality of life in our rural communities. i would like to thank congressman clyburn and congressman perriello for their hard work and dedication to improving energy efficiency and their support for the agriculture provisions within this act. mr. speaker, i strongly support the agriculture provisions contained in this act and encourage its passage. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lucas, is recognized. mr. lucas: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lucas: mr. chairman, i must rise today in opposition to h.r. 4785, the rural energy savings program act. as a result of the democratic leadership's failed policies, we are now considering a bill that creates two new government funded programs to address high energy bills and energy demand. we are considering creating a program that duplicates thousands of other measures that congress has passed and funded
in billions of dollars in the last several years. h.r. 4785 as reported by the agriculture committee would require the government through usda to front nearly $1 billion to rural electric cooperatives so that they can in return make what might potentially be risky loans to their customers for energy efficiency projects in their homes. the investments made in this program would only benefit an estimated 1.5 million of the 43 million customers served by rural electric cooperatives. energy efficiency is an important step in an overall energy plan. but creating a new government funded program is not the solution. this issue can be addressed in the farm bill by making adjustments to current programs. the 2008 farm bill included a provision that would have allowed rural electric cooperatives to expand the clean energy production and provide
affordable electricity for more of its customers, however, the provision was stripped by the current democratic leadership. as a result, rural electric cooperatives cannot access our u.s. lending or base low generation. in other words, base low generation from source such asñ not impossible to finance through the program now. . even more alarming is that this is not the bill that was reported on the committee. instead the democratic leadership created a bill that is five times larger and includes a program that was already stripped, already stripped, the home star program on the house floor, by bipartisan support. it will give the department of energy another program and billions more taxpayer dollars to administer.
why would congress add to a failed stimulus policy? the american recovery and reinvestment act alone created the $5.25 billion weatherization assistance program for home energy efficiency updates. which has been, some say, a colossal failure from an implementation perspective and very well may have wasted huge amounts of taxpayer dollars at the hands of the department of energy. the democratic leadership is pushing energy policy that will create increased and burdensome energy costs for americans. as a result we're creating new government programs that increase spending to address the consequences of those policies. i urge my colleagues, oppose the bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma.
the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. holden: mr. speaker, i thought in rotation would be the gentleman from north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. butterfield: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i'm a proud co-sponsor of the bill authored by the dwrished majority whip of south carolina -- distinguished in a er -- majority whip of south carolina. it will not only quickly create construction and manufacturing jobs but it will also help americans make their homes more energy efficient. the agriculture committee reported this bill favorably in july and i want to commend the chairman of the committee, mr. peterson, and mr. clyburn, for subsequently working with my committee to actually improve the legislation. the bill includes the home star energy efficiency loan program that was reported by the energy and commerce committee on april 15, 2010, as part of h.r. 5019,
the home star energy retrofit act of 2010. mr. speaker, h.r. 5019 was approved by the committee with a bipartisan vote of 30-17. it was supported by a broad array of stakeholders including energy efficiency advocates, manufacturers and small businesses, business and industry trade associations and small businesses. under this bill homeowners anywhere in the country will be able to work with their utility or other lender to borrow money for proven energy efficiency investments in their homes. they would repay the loans over time, generally from a portion of the money they save on their energy bill. and at an interest rate of not more than 3%. the lenders would repay their states and the states would repay the federal government after not more than 20 years. the home star energy efficiency loan program is a natural companion, mr. speaker, to the
rural energy savings program act. as you may know, the rural energy savings act authorizes zero interest loans to rural electric corporatives for purposes of offering loans for energy efficiency home retrofits. the home star energy efficiency loan program will authorize zero interest loans to those portions of the country not served, i repeat that, not served by rural electric corporatives. i introduced this bill because it serves consumers across the country. my district in north carolina is served by 10 electric -- rural electric could he opposite, in addition to the 20 municipal power utilities and two investor-owned utilities. across the country, cooperatives only serve 20% of the nation's population. so the provisions included in the substitute amendment will ensure that a homeowner will have the same access to a low-interest energy efficiency
loan whether or not they are served by a could op or an investor owned utility or a municipality. under the home star loan program, states could borrow a federal fund to allow entities like electric utilities or other entities, provide loans to consumers for residential energy efficiency measures. the department of energy in consultation with the secretary of agriculture would identify the eligible energy efficiency measures. the programs in this bill, mr. speaker, vary significantly from the weatherization assistance program. whetherization is a grant program -- weatherization is a grant programmed used to reduce energy bills by making homes more energy efficient. the programs in this bill are loans and thus do not increase the deficit. they are available to anyone regardless of income. some of my republican colleagues have questioned this bill's necessity, due to the significant investment made to the weatherization program made
in the recovery act. well, while i concede that weatherization got off to a slow start, today over 30,000 homes each month are being weatherized across the country. in september the department of energy announced that it had weatherized over 200,000 homes across the country. in june 960 homes were weatherized in my state of north carolina. each of the low income families living in those 960 homes will save an average of $437 annually on their energy bills. but that's not why we're here today. we're here to offer all americans a chance to lower their utility bills and put their neighbors back to work. the recession has had a significant impact on the home construction and services industry which has experienced unemployment rates of 27%. additionally, manufacturing plants have produced construction-related products, have operated at 50% of capacity.
home energy retrofit work can provide and it will provide significant employment opportunities for construction workers who are boosting domestic manufacturing. more than 92% of the energy efficient products and materials for which the home star program will stimulate sales are manufactured here in the united states of america. home energy efficiency retrofits can also cut the nation's energy use, saving consumers money and cutting pollution. american homes account for about 33% of the nation's total electricity demand at approximately 22% of all energy use in the united states. this legislation, mr. speaker, presents an opportunity for all of us to work together to save energy and create jobs. i urge all colleagues, all of our colleagues, to seize this opportunity. thank you, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, at this
time i have no further scheduled speakers. i would reserve my time with anticipation of a brief comment at the end of the debate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time -- the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. >> mr. speaker, i yield four minutes to mr. clyburn. the chair: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for four minutes. mr. clyburn: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and i thank my friend, chairman holden, for yielding me the time. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 4785, the rural saveings program act and i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the rural star as it is popularily called is an important piece of the make it in america agenda. it's a program that will create jobs and help save families money on their energy bills. supreme court justice brand eyes once called our 50 states laboratories of democracy.
and that is certainly the case with this home-grown american-owned ideal. the rural electric coops in south carolina brought this idea to my attention late last year and i worked with my colleague, congressman johnson sfrat, to craft legislation that -- john spratt, to craft legislation. i am very proud that south carolina is providing significant leadership for our economic recovery. with this innovative approach to job creation and energy savings. the concept is very simple. low cost home improvement loans for energy efficient upgrades, ceilings, installation, heat pumps and other structural improvements. those low cost loans are paid back on customers' electricity bills. with the energy savings covering the cost of the loan. and when the term of the loan
expires, most people will be saving hundreds of dollars annually on their monthly utility bills. this bipartisan, bicameral legislation is first and foremost a jobs bill. and it is based on commonsense ideas that can be done in a fiscally responsible manner that will protect taxpayers and the treasury. let me emphasize that this is a voluntary loan program, not a grant or rebate. and the loans are paid back to the federal treasury. we call in the rural energy savings program because it will save consumers energy and money. more importantly, it will put people back to work, particularly in the building and construction trades and manufacturinging industries. sectors that have been hard hit by the economic downturn. by providing home energy
upgrades and significant employment opportunities for buildings and construction workers, this legislation will boost domestic manufacturing, retailers of energy-efficient building materials and appliances will also benefit from increased sales. virtually all of the energy-efficient products and materials used for energy efficiency improvements are made in america. rural star has the support of a broad coalition of stakeholders, including the national societies of manufacturers, the national association of homebuilders, the retail industry lenders association and the national rural electric cooperatives association. rural star will create high-skilled, high-wage manufacturing and construction jobs and deliver meaningful energy savings for our consumes that are will put money directly into their wallets. i urge all of my colleagues to
support this bill. let's create jobs that were made in america so that our fellow citizens can make it in america. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from oklahoma. the gentleman from oklahoma continue to reserve? mr. lucas: i continue to reserve, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. holden: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from south carolina, chairman of the budget committee, mr. spratt. mr. spratt: i thank the gentleman for yielding and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the chair: without objection. mr. spratt: mr. chairman, this bill will authorize the rural utility services to make loans to rural electric coops so the coops can make loans to families and small businesses for measures that meet federal standards. this process will begin with an energy audit aimed at identifying energy-saving measures. based on this audit, the coops will propose improvements like
installation or high-efficiency heat pumps. consumers will pay the coops through a charge in their utility bills spread over a period of five to 10 years. the savings will cover much if not all of the loan repayment and after the loan is repaid the participating consume already continue to save as will the economy because of the more efficient use of energy. there are more than 200,000 rural electric cooperative customers in my district. many of them below the poverty level. many of these hardworking people would gladly invest in their homes to make them more efficient, but they cannot borrow or afford the funds necessary to install a new heat pump or place installation in the walls and ceilings. this is where the ingenuity of the cooperates -- coops comes in. a program that can be implemented nationwide that would provide a simple but effective solution to help customers at relatively low cost. at the same time they would create new jobs by making low cost loans available to install high-energy impact efficiency
improvements. the loans rb repaid over time -- will be repaid over time and ideally there will be a net reduction utility payments even when accounting for the loan repayments. this is a win-win solution to a major problem. i urge support for this bill. this is a well -- this is well crafted and will not have an impact on the bottom line of the budget because we're talking about loans made by the federal government to the electric coops which i'm sure will be duly repaid. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. lucas: mr. chairman, i continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. holden: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield four minutes to mr. perriello. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for four minutes. mr. perriello: thank you. this is a great day and a great program. this is the kind of commonsense approach people are looking for right now, to help cut some costs for families that are struggling and help put construction crews back to work that are desperately under
demand in this economy. here we have a chance to help support american construction, using american-manufactured products to reduce the electric bills of rural americans. including seniors on fixed income, including middle class families and working class families. it's the kind of common sense that has always made this country stronger and more vibrant and here we are at a time when construction is down, that we can be stepping up to renovate the building stock that we have and we know in our rural communities our building stock is less efficient than in much of the rest of america. so here we have a chance to make our rural communities more competitive and more livable. the utilities, as partners, because the only remedying factor here is upfront capital. we know that the market can drive the rest. so helping the utilities to provide that upfront investment, to unleash construction crews going to work, to renovate homes, using american -manufactured products like insulation, double-paned glass,
window film, including the best window film in the world we can make in my district, that reduces electric bills. if you're a senior on a fixed income and you see your electric rates go up and up, there's nothing you can take out of that budget. you don't have some party budget that you're going to give up. it's a fixed income. if we can help reduce that electric bill, that's more money for food and for transportation and for other needs that our seniors and our working families face. . do best. making things, building things, growing things in america. and saving money for the average american that is so stretched right now. so we should not delay, we should pass this today on a bipartisan basis. we should make sure the senate follows suit because this is the kind of common sense that can support those construction jobs we need. those manufacturing jobs we need, and that economic relief that our working and middle class families desperately need. i urge all of my colleagues to
be part of this commonsense solution and get us going and making things in america again today. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. lucas: reserve. mr. holden: i have no further requests. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. lucas: i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. chairman, i have the greatest confidence, faith, and believe in the integrity and intention of my colleagues as they work on this bill, but, mr. chairman, this is adding $5 billion more dollars on top of hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars that we have spent over the course of the last year and a half, plus we don't have. i would simply urge my colleagues turn this bill back, let's not add $5 billion more on to what we have already spent. let's fulfill our constitutional responsibilities and has our 12 appropriation bills in regular
session. let's fulfill our responsibility to our constituents and the economy they have to work in by addressing the tax issues from 2001 and 2003. let's just go home. there's a political storm brewing out there. this is going to be a different body in january. let's do what we are obligated to do under the constitution and for our constituents and go home. with that i yield back the remainder of my time, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. holden: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we know that rural cooperatives would need to double its generating capacity. several reports including one done by usda say it will take a 10-year capital requirement of $65.5 billion, $49.9 billion which would be for new generation, and this does not take into consideration the $10 billion needed for transmission and the $3 billion to retrofit. that would be a tremendous expense to the consumer across
rural america. energy efficiency investment is the way we need to proceed. i encourage adoption of the bill and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas seeks recognition. mr. barton: i thank the distinguished chairman for recognizing me. do i seek recognition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. barton: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the chair: without objection. mr. barton: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the bill before us today. i'm going to ask my colleagues to vote no. we had a similar bill on the floor back in may and in that bill we offered a motion to
recommit which passed which struck the lone star program, the the home star loan program -- the home star loan program, excuse me, i'm from texas i think lone star. that's a problem sometimes. this bill, the bill that we struck the loan program from back in may, was a $324 million authorization. this bill has come back to us at a $5 billion authorization. that is a little bit of a puzzlement. if it didn't make sense in may to start a new program for $300 million, it doesn't make sense in september to start the same program except for $5 billion. so if for no other reason we should vote against this bill.
the second point i want to make is that the programs in the bill are worthwhile. i know that seems to be a little bit inconsistent with what i just said, but it's not that these are bad programs. the question is can we afford them when we have a deficit that's going to be between $1.2 trillion and $1.4 trillion this year. in another energy efficiency bill that has become law last year, we authorized and i think we appropriated $4.7 billion for the department of energy to do the same sort of programs that this bill would authorize. today the department of energy has spent about 10% of that, a little less than $500 million.
so they have over $4 billion that's been appropriated that hasn't been spent. now, i'm not casting stones on the department of energy. it probably makes sense to take your time setting up the program and making sure you get the processes and the requirements to participate in the right form. but if we have an existing program that's been appropriated and has over $4 billion surplus in it, i don't see the need for another program. one might say this is for rural america, for -- or for specific homeowners, but to my knowledge, and i've got the ag committee here, there would be no exclusions because of the location under the program that the department of energy is currently implementing. would point out that two years
ago the federal debt was a little under $6 trillion. we have added almost $3 trillion to it in the last two years. i can't see that there isn't much net improvement that's happened to our economy with the expenditure of that much money. in addition to that much money to the debt. it is not a case, mr. chairman, of coming to the floor and saying this is a good program, support it. with these kind of deficits i think we need to think as a body is this a program that is absolutely essential, and is it worth adding more to the public debt to pass this program? with all due respect, while this is a good program, it is not a program that i think we should add to our children and grandchildren's debt. so i would urge a no vote at the
appropriate time and with that i would reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from north carolina. mr. butterfield: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i at this time yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from vermont, mr. welch, who is a member of the energy and commerce committee. the chair: the gentleman from vermont is recognized for two minutes. mr. welch: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to first of all thank the gentleman from texas because he did help make this bill and the home star bill a better bill. there is a question here about why do we provide this money in a time of a deficit. there is an answer to that. america faces right now two great challenges. one is high unemployment. we've got to put people back to work. the other is, an energy policy that's not as clean as it needs to be. it's not as sustainable as it must be. and it's not as affordable as it
should be. this legislation addresses both of those challenges by investing in energy efficiency. this is with people making their own decision abouts how to best do that in their own rural homes. we invest in our economy. over 90% of the materials are manufactured in the united states of america. by slowing our wasteful use of energy, we can save homeowners hundreds of millions of dollars, that's money this their pocket they can spend on other things. good for the economy. and by of course reducing the amount of costly oil we import from hostile nations, we can create clean energy jobs here at home. so this is a practical approach to addressing persistent high unemployment, tight family budgets, and climate change. this is a win-win-win for families, for our economy, and for our energy future. i applaud mr. clyburn and the other sponsors, mr. spratt, and
urge the passage of this legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from texas. mr. barton: mr. chairman, i have one speaker, but he's not on the floor so i'll have to reserve for the time being. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from north carolina. mr. butterfield: it doesn't appear we have any additional speakers on this side. therefore we will continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman from texas. mr. barton: we have planes to catch if my friends on the majority are willing to close, i'm willing to close. i'm not sure the proper protocol who goes first. mr. butterfield: i yield to the ranking member for the purpose of closing. the chair: the gentleman from texas. mr. barton: i make it short and sweet. this is the same bill that was rejected under suspension back in may. with the exception that the authorization on the home star program has been increased i believe by 13 fold. i suggested a no vote then.
i continue to suggest a no vote and would ask for a no vote at the appropriate time. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from north carolina. mr. butterfield: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and thank the ranking member for his comments. we continue to say that this legislation is a good bill and it is certainly deficit neutral. it has been judged that way by the congressional budget office. it is a loan program. it is not a grant program. it will not add to the deficit. it will not add to the debt in any respect. i would like to encourage my colleagues to distinguish this program from the department of energy program that is a weatherization program. weatherization program as we all know as members is intended to help low-income families. it's a grant program. this is a loan program whereby federal dollars are given to an investor owned utility or to a rural cooperative and the money is used then in turn to make low-interest loans to families
who qualify. it's not income based. there are qualifications for the loans, but the family income is not a qualification to qualify for the loan. we must enable the american people to weatherize their homes. 40% in some instances of their utility bills can be attributed to the loss of heat and air within the homes. so this program is intended to help install replacement windows and insulation and other things that would make homes more energy efficient. it would pay for itself. it's a good bill. i ask my colleagues to support it. with that if i have no other speakers, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time for general debate has expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on agriculture printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the
five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part a of house report 111-594. the amendment in the nay a substitute shall be considered as read. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute is in order except those printed in part b of the report. each amendment may be offered only in the order printed by the report, by a member designated by the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and the opponent. shall not be subject to amendment. and shall not be subject to demand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in part b of house report 111-594. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. holden: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in part b of house printed in part b of house report number